Many coaches are now incorporating the one-back set into parts of their offense. I feel strongly that it can be used as a legitimate full time offense. I believe it was developed early on by Don Coryell, but his protégé Joe Gibbs took it to the next level. His utilization of multiple formations, shifting, and motions baffled opponents. I believe in the year of their first championship (super bowl 17) the Redskins set a new NFL record for points in season.

Most standard offenses employ 2 wide receivers a tight end and 2 running backs. As football evolved and misdirection was being phased out, the I-formation was becoming the dominant set, and the fullback was carrying the ball less and less. The fullback was now a blocker first. But why have a back in the backfield that is doing nothing but blocking? What Joe Gibbs did was substitute that blocking fullback and put in a third wide receiver, a play maker. And when that third receiver lined up wide, the defense had to respect that and take a defender out of the box to line up on the wide receiver. Not only did this help the passing game but the more spread out formation stretched the defense horizontally and the passing threat stretched them vertically. The formation decreases the defense in the box by 18% which opens up a lot of natural space for the runningback. And when Gibbs wanted that blocking specialist in he employed another tight end (H-back) who was a bigger blocker than a fu llback and was lined up in a position to be more involved with the passing game.

Formations: We have four base formations which can be altered into infinite variations

weakstrongtwinsflood

Shifts: When we are going to shift we get set and shift on the first sound, the farthest man moves first as if he was going in motion, when he passes the QB the second man starts to move WEAK <--> TWINS STRONG <--> FLOOD (we also will do a shift where the Y shifts to the other side, this is called "FLIP")

An offensive system that is unique and an opposing team is not used to facing will cause pandemonium for their defense. Defensive players are trying to remember their assignments and keys according to strength of formation, etc. then along comes a shift, then a second shift, then a motion...Multiple formation looks and a shift package is a weapon in itself.

We have two main running plays, the power slant, and the counter-trey. Both plays have to be run in a corresponding manner, the slant is the staple and the counter keeps the defense honest.

POWER SLANT- The power slant is an off-tackle run with zone blocking the last defender on the line of scrimmage is being kicked out by the TE the rest of the O-line is trying to seal their man in, if the defense over pursues they can push their defender out towards the original hole and the RB will find the cutback lane.

COUNTER TREY- Lets say we're running the counter-trey to the right out of the WEAK formation (2 TE set)

H- Fill for LT (protect backside) LT- Pull and seal LG- Pull and kick out end man on line of scrimmage C- Gap down RG- Gap down RT- Gap down Y- Gap down With all the shifts and motions, there 100 ways to block the frontside and there are 100 ways to protect the backside of the counter-trey.

STARBURST PASS-3 receivers are clustered close together and then spread apart in different directions. can be run with motion or in the FLOOD formation in a "bunch" alignment

inside receiver (H) is running a 5 yard flat route middle receiver (Z) is running a 10 yard flag route outside receiver (X) is coming underneath the Z and picking H's defender QB-5 step drop (man) progression from H-Z-X (zone) read flat defender if he drops off hit H, if he comes up or widens hit Z. There are a few other 5 step plays we use out different formations with different positions interchanging roles on different plays (ex. In some case the RB will be running the flat in the starburst). Along with our 3-step passing attack (slants, quick-outs, 7 yd. bedrock) and the play-action series, it is quite a formidable passing game.

The main philosophy is to execute a few plays to perfection out of many looks. The pre-snap movement causes confusion on defense and creates match-up problems.

RIP 21

"Nah, I trust the laws of nature to stay constant. I don't pray that the sun will rise tomorrow, and I don't need to pray that someone will beat the Cowboys in the playoffs." - Irn-Bru

JansenFan, you have a knack for coming up with this stuff. That was an outstanding article that should be required reading for Redskin fans this season, ecspecially those who are wondering what to expect from the Gibbs offense.

Coryell did indeed develop this offense, but Gibbs perfected it, and it is still being used today. In fact, those Minnesota Viking teams that broke the old Redskin scoring records were using this same offense.

JansenFan wrote:Written by Danny Knitzer: But why have a back in the backfield that is doing nothing but blocking? What Joe Gibbs did was substitute that blocking fullback and put in a third wide receiver, a play maker...And when Gibbs wanted that blocking specialist in he employed another tight end (H-back) who was a bigger blocker than a fullback and was lined up in a position to be more involved with the passing game.

This is the essence of the offense. In this paragraph you see evidence as to why pro football players have the role they do today. The slot reciever, the running fullback and the slick-handed tight end were all born out of this concept. Guys like Az-Hakim are following in the footsteps of Ricky Sanders, Mike Alstott in the footsteps of John Riggins, and Kellen Winslow Jr. in the footsteps of Kellen Winslow Sr.

It's all in the sources! A friend of mine used this in an argument over who the better coach was, Coach Gibbs versus Bill Walsh. The Walsh camp was insinuating that he had invented the West Coast offense where as Coach Gibbs stole his from Don Coryell. Very interesting stuff, when this guy gets to arguing Coach Gibbs and Redskins. I will be sure to post more as I come across it.

RIP 21

"Nah, I trust the laws of nature to stay constant. I don't pray that the sun will rise tomorrow, and I don't need to pray that someone will beat the Cowboys in the playoffs." - Irn-Bru

Chalk-talk time, sports fans.
Inquiring minds want to know, when is a one-back offense really not a one-
back offense?
When is an offense predictable?
Joe Gibbs, coach of the Redskins, played answer man for these questions
yesterday.
Gibbs has heard so many questions about his one-back offense and had it
called predictable so many times, he went to the extraordinary step yesterday
to call a press conference to explain his reasoning behind the Redskins'
offense. Gibbs even used a chalkboard to draw diagrams.
"Most of the teams you see in the NFL are predictable," Gibbs said. "You
look at the teams that line up with two backs, like the (Los Angeles) Raiders
and the (New York) Giants. Ninety percent of the time, you know who's going to
get the ball. Marcus Allen (Raiders) and Joe Morris (Giants).
"What frosted me about the 1983 Super Bowl (actually in January of 1984
against the Raiders) was that they lined up in three formations and didn't
move once they got into one of them. Talk about predictable, that's 1912. And
they beat us, and nobody said a word to them."
All right, fine. What's that got to do with the one back offense?
Plenty.
As Gibbs explained it, the Redskins' one back is no different, really,
from other teams' two-backs. All the Redskins do is put their blocking back
closer to the line of scrimmage, put him in motion at times and give him a
better blocking angle on his opponent.
"He's (Don Warren in this case for the Redskins) doing the same thing as
the blocking back for the other team," Gibbs said. "What we need to do is
put a 20 number on him.
"We've got a saying in football, `That's a good way to get your neck
shortened.' That's what you do when you run a long way to make a block,
especially on someone like Lawrence Taylor (the Giants' premier linebacker and
author)."
A predictable offense, Gibbs said, is one that isn't producing. And the
Redskins, he said, are producing yards and points.
"People ask about putting George (Rogers) and Kelvin (Bryant, both running
backs) in at the same time. If one of them was a blocker, that would be
fine," Gibbs said. "But they're runners, and I think it would almost be a
sin to ask either one of them to be a blocking back.
"We're better off putting one over here."
And Gibbs drew an arrow on the chalkboard to a rectangle he'd drawn on the
side.
"On the bench," he said.